State's Rights; Gun Rights

State's Rights; Gun Rights

Few things make liberal editorialists more nervous than proposals to make it easier for ordinary people to exercise their Second Amendment rights. And thereÆs nothing that infuriates gun rights enthusiasts more than the handful of states that have refused to liberalize their laws to allow concealed-carry permits to be easily obtained.

Democrat-run Maryland allows concealed-carry, but on such a strict set of requirements that for the vast majority of would-be permit holders there is little chance of getting one. People like Governor Martin OÆMalley, when pressed on the situation, say ôwe have a permit processö without admitting the obvious: That the process is biased toward denial of the permit.

There is a bill in Congress û the National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 û that would mandate that 49 of the 50 states in America honor concealed-carry permits issued by any other state. (Illinois is exempted because it totally bans handguns. How that works in the wake of the pro-Second Amendment SCOTUS ruling last year is beyond me).

Sponsored by Florida Republican Rep. Cliff Stearns, this legislation is in response to the frustrations of permit holders who must either not carry their weapons when traveling to or through a state that doesnÆt honor their license. Some have been arrested for what they erroneously assumed to be an innocent act.

Already with enough promised GOP votes to pass the House, the bill has sparked an interesting flip/flop: Dems, usually skeptical about anything based on stateÆs rights, are all in favor of them in this instance. Repubs have suddenly discovered a usurpation of stateÆs rights much to their liking.

The Baltimore Sun calls the proposal a ôrace to the bottom on concealed-carry laws.ö The editorial begins by citing madman Jared LoughnerÆs mass murder spree in Arizona in January, pointing out that Arizona doesnÆt even require a permit to carry a concealed gun outside the home.

ôAs the incident demonstrated,ö says the writer, ôsuch a lax approach would seem to invite mayhem in the streets.ö

Really? WhatÆs the evidence for that? How come Chicago, with the strictest ban in the nation on handguns, is ever more known for the mayhem on its streets?

As much as liberals like to denounce liberalized carry laws for the violence sure to come after their enactment, the fact is that simply doesnÆt happen. It didnÆt happen in Florida subsequent to 1989, not in Virginia a few years later, in fact, not anywhere else.

The late liberal columnist for the Washington Post, Mary McGrory, wrote that she would never again set foot in Virginia after its law passed, because of the gun violence that was sure to explode.

If she wrote that from the heavily-guarded Post building in D.C., or even if she didnÆt, how could she escape the irony of her tirade, considering the level of gun crime in the nationÆs capital despite its draconian gun laws?

Oh, thatÆs right; irony is not a liberal trait.

MarylandÆs pols are eager to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states that allow them, and have no problem with recognizing driverÆs licenses from across the land, which, I must point out, like carry permits, are issued under varying standards of severity.

The Sun says of the bill in Congress, ôIt implies that arming people makes the streets safer, a notion that common sense and experience deny. The more lax the gun laws, the more likely that dangerous people will acquire handguns, as a recent report by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence profiling 13 murderers who held concealed-carry permits makes clear.ö

There are millions of permit holders in this nation. With the exceedingly rare exceptions such as those studied by the Brady people, they donÆt commit gun crimes.

To learn the truth about guns and crime, pick up a copy of Professor John R. LottÆs newly revised More Guns, Less Crime. If I thought it would do any good, IÆd get one for the SunÆs Andy Green. But it wouldnÆt, so I wonÆt.